Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Matthew Alan Hufstetler <gt2778a@*****.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 20:29:03 -0400
Well, in our current campaign there are a Sorcery adept, a Physical Inept,
i mean Adept, a Rigger, a NPC(Who doesn't count) and my Shaman. The thing
is, EVERYONE in the group has lost at LEAST .5 essence due to cyberware.

The Sorcery Adept is down 2.25, The PhysAd is down about .5, and my
current Shaman is down 2.0.

Normally I play my Magical people very clean, but this time I went totally
the other direction.

My question is, how often, and how much, do you guys cyber up your magical
types? Do you do it at character generation or later, when you can find a
shadow clinic?
Message no. 2
From: Brian McCallister <mccllstr@*****.BUCKNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 23:59:03 -0400
> How much do you all cyber up magica active people?

My Shaman has lost about, hmm .5 plus .3 plus .15 (maybe .1) for a
smartlink, softlink, and datajack I (last two from Shadowtech). This brings
his magic to 5. He hasn't been able to initiate or bond any power foci :(
As this is the first mage/shaman I've run. I guess it's typical of me :)
BTW I did this at character generation.

Side note. I took my spells at force 6. First time I went to cast my mob
mind at force six cuz I fogot I had put the cyberware in wuz a problem.
The GM remebered even if I didn't :)

Brian McCallister---------------------------------------------------Skrub
"I get to play Doom on a Pentium 90 !!!!!!!"
-Skrub, before being shot for unknown reasons
Message no. 3
From: Mercenary X <kdye@*****.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 21:04:05 -0700
\ /
M E R C E N A R Y X
/ \ kdye@*****.stanford.edu

On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Brian McCallister wrote:

> My Shaman has lost about, hmm .5 plus .3 plus .15 (maybe .1) for a
> smartlink, softlink, and datajack I (last two from Shadowtech). This brings
> his magic to 5. He hasn't been able to initiate or bond any power foci :(

Why did you install a datajack, he can't use it.
Message no. 4
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 00:38:28 -0400
On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Mercenary X wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Brian McCallister wrote:

B McC> > My Shaman has lost about, hmm .5 plus .3 plus .15 (maybe .1) for a
B McC> > smartlink, softlink, and datajack I (last two from Shadowtech).
B McC> > This brings
B McC> > his magic to 5. He hasn't been able to initiate or bond any power
B McC> > foci :( >

Merc X> Why did you install a datajack, he can't use it.

Actully he can. Decks aren't the only things run off of
datajacks. Having a datajack gives you access to a lot of stuff,
including knowsoft chips (if you can't afford a real chipjack)
datajack-linked vehicles, public information networks and a plethora of
other information-age goodies.

Marc
Message no. 5
From: Paolo Marcucci <marcucci@***.TS.ASTRO.IT>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types (fwd)
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 09:25:23 METDST
>
> \ /
> M E R C E N A R Y X
> / \ kdye@*****.stanford.edu
>
> On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Brian McCallister wrote:
>
> > My Shaman has lost about, hmm .5 plus .3 plus .15 (maybe .1) for a
> > smartlink, softlink, and datajack I (last two from Shadowtech). This brings
> > his magic to 5. He hasn't been able to initiate or bond any power foci :(
>
> Why did you install a datajack, he can't use it.
>

Hmmm, I'm not sure. A mage can use a datajack AND a deck. He doesn't do
it very well (as stated in Virtual Realities) but there are no game mods
about it.

I (as a GM) don't allow it, however.

I (as a player) have got a datajack and a deck for my physad :)

--
_________________________________________________________________________
Paolo Marcucci marcucci@***.ts.astro.it
http://www.oat.ts.astro.it/marcucci/home.html
Message no. 6
From: Skrub <mccllstr@*****.BUCKNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 09:51:20 -0400
> > smartlink, softlink, and datajack I (last two from Shadowtech). This brings
> > his magic to 5. He hasn't been able to initiate or bond any power foci :(
>
> Why did you install a datajack, he can't use it.
>

Why not?
Message no. 7
From: Skrub <mccllstr@*****.BUCKNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types (fwd)
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 09:57:15 -0400
Not having Virtual Realities (Although my GM picked up about 3 days ago)
I have no clue what you are talking about when you say a mage cannot use
a Deck. Why not? Or is this a FASA says so inorder to try to curb mages a
little bit rule?

Brian McCallister---------------------------------------------------Skrub
"I get to play Doom on a Pentium 90 !!!!!!!"
-Skrub, before being shot for unknown reasons
Message no. 8
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@****.CAIS.COM>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 11:05:28 -0400
On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Mercenary X wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Brian McCallister wrote:
>
> > My Shaman has lost about, hmm .5 plus .3 plus .15 (maybe .1) for a
> > smartlink, softlink, and datajack I (last two from Shadowtech). This brings
> > his magic to 5. He hasn't been able to initiate or bond any power foci :(
>
> Why did you install a datajack, he can't use it.
>
Sure he can..._anybody_ can. The rules suggest against a Mage
being a Decker because they aren't as _effective_, but it is not (last I
heard) totally disallowed.
Besides, datajacks are used for a lot more than decking.
Message no. 9
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types (fwd)
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 11:22:55 -0400
It's not that mage CAN'T use a deck. It's just that the +8
modifier to everything that they do is a bit of a deterrant, see.

Marc
Message no. 10
From: Gareth Owen <glowen1@*****.NHS.GOV.UK>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types (fwd)
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 17:33:09 +0100
>
> It's not that mage CAN'T use a deck. It's just that the +8
> modifier to everything that they do is a bit of a deterrant, see.
>
> Marc
>
>
Eh? Where's that from? What have I missed?

GLO

--
Gareth Owen | Mail: glowen1@*****.nhs.gov.uk
Message no. 11
From: Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 11:11:21 -0700
If I were to lose essence on a magician, I'd spend that .3
Essence for a bioware Trauma Damper, and say goodbye to Light Drain.
Arguably the single most effective piece of bio/cyberware for magicians.

+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|Adam Getchell|acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu | ez000270@*******.ucdavis.edu |
| acgetchell |"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent"|
+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 12
From: King of Pain <mcgowan@*****.BUCKNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types (fwd)
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 15:43:50 -0400
On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Marc A Renouf wrote:

> It's not that mage CAN'T use a deck. It's just that the +8
> modifier to everything that they do is a bit of a deterrant, see.


+8 modifier??? Where the hell did that one come from....

Increasingly curious


RDM
Message no. 13
From: Skrub <mccllstr@*****.BUCKNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types (fwd)
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 16:11:18 -0400
> It's not that mage CAN'T use a deck. It's just that the +8
> modifier to everything that they do is a bit of a deterrant, see.

Umh, +8 modifier to everything.

yes of course, that must be becuz of Bizfan's Law of AAS (**&* addict
syndrome) that proves that no one person can know how to do two things
reasonably well. The late Dr. Xagyg of TSRU advanced this theory
previously. Modern thinkers however have begun to doubt the existance of
the Law of AAS holding true in a society where nearly everyone has at
least a primary education. However, no one doubts the existance of AAS in
and of itself, as it reers it's ugly head here as well.

-Skrub
Message no. 14
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types (fwd)
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 16:20:13 -0400
On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Gareth Owen wrote:

> >
> > It's not that mage CAN'T use a deck. It's just that the +8
> > modifier to everything that they do is a bit of a deterrant, see.
> >
> > Marc
> >
> >
> Eh? Where's that from? What have I missed?

Virtual Realities, pg 52-53. Actually, it gives two posibilities
for modifiers, those being 1.) add the Magic Attribute of the mage to any
task, or 2.) add the sorcery skill of the mage to any task. I just used
+8 as an example number, but you can easily see how the drastically
different world view makes things difficult for mages when they are
trying to deck. By the way, both of these are optional rules, as stated
in Virtual Realities, but they are good for game-balalnce and even make
some modicum of sense.

Marc
Message no. 15
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 09:47:57 +1000
Adam Getchell:

> If I were to lose essence on a magician, I'd spend that .3
> Essence for a bioware Trauma Damper, and say goodbye to Light Drain.
> Arguably the single most effective piece of bio/cyberware for magicians.

This sounds like a quick way to reduce the mage's Magic rating to 1;
surely the trauma damper is like an automatically-applied stimpatch?
(Otherwise, why couldn't a mage apply the trauma damper chemicals via a
patch, for the same benefit?)

luke
Message no. 16
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@****.CAIS.COM>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 01:06:32 -0400
On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Adam Getchell wrote:

> If I were to lose essence on a magician, I'd spend that .3
> Essence for a bioware Trauma Damper, and say goodbye to Light Drain.
> Arguably the single most effective piece of bio/cyberware for magicians.

_Nice_ idea...I'd never thought of that application. The Trauma
Damper always seemed sorta useless to me, except perhaps in sports.
D'ye think a tips & tricks section would be a good addition to
the next NERPS book? Email me privately, or over on the NERPS list, if
you have comments....

--
J.D. Falk <jdfalk@****.com>
NERPS Editor & General Motivator
Message no. 17
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@****.CAIS.COM>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 01:31:46 -0400
On Tue, 13 Sep 1994, J.D. Falk wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Adam Getchell wrote:
>
> > If I were to lose essence on a magician, I'd spend that .3
> > Essence for a bioware Trauma Damper, and say goodbye to Light Drain.
> > Arguably the single most effective piece of bio/cyberware for magicians.
>
> _Nice_ idea...I'd never thought of that application. The Trauma
> Damper always seemed sorta useless to me, except perhaps in sports.

Whoops...Luke set us right on that one. Never mind. *grin*
Message no. 18
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 16:28:18 +1000
luke writes:

> surely the trauma damper is like an automatically-applied stimpatch?
> (Otherwise, why couldn't a mage apply the trauma damper chemicals via a
> patch, for the same benefit?)

Hey, Cool, have a trauma damper type stim patch. Sure beats shelling out for
they bioware. Oughta be possible to do too.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 19
From: King of Pain <mcgowan@*****.BUCKNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 09:13:13 -0400
> On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Adam Getchell wrote:
>
> > If I were to lose essence on a magician, I'd spend that .3
> > Essence for a bioware Trauma Damper, and say goodbye to Light Drain.
> > Arguably the single most effective piece of bio/cyberware for magicians.

Effective piece of cyberware, but very, very dangerous. Yeah you'll have
a grand old time flinging around hellblasts and not even feeling
it....until you pass out. Remember, when this baby is on you DON'T know
what the condition of your ummm, health thingi(I'm at a sudden loss for
words, how embarassing;). What does this also mean?? It means that the
GM keeps track of it *evil GM's cackle*. And i'm not too certain about
this part(benn a bit since i read shadowtech) but wouldn't the GM perform
the drain resistence rolls in this situation as well?


RDM
Message no. 20
From: King of Pain <mcgowan@*****.BUCKNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types (fwd)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 08:54:51 -0400
> Virtual Realities, pg 52-53. Actually, it gives two posibilities
> for modifiers, those being 1.) add the Magic Attribute of the mage to any
> task, or 2.) add the sorcery skill of the mage to any task. I just used
> +8 as an example number, but you can easily see how the drastically
> different world view makes things difficult for mages when they are
> trying to deck. By the way, both of these are optional rules, as stated
> in Virtual Realities, but they are good for game-balalnce and even make
> some modicum of sense.
>
> Marc
>

Thanx, I just got my Virtual Realities about three days ago and hadn't
had the opportunity to look through it thoroghly yet(although i did read
the novella, very good to all those out there who care)

RDM
Message no. 21
From: John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 10:01:33 -0600
On Tue, 13 Sep 1994, MILLIKEN DAMION A wrote:

> > surely the trauma damper is like an automatically-applied stimpatch?
> > (Otherwise, why couldn't a mage apply the trauma damper chemicals via a
> > patch, for the same benefit?)
>
> Hey, Cool, have a trauma damper type stim patch. Sure beats shelling out for
> they bioware. Oughta be possible to do too.

Well, from what I remember, Magicians run a high risk of losing Magic
Attribute points when they use Trauma patches...<whips out rulebook>...well,
I can't find it, but I'm pretty sure that I saw something about it.

John IV aka John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.cc.utah.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code 2.1
GM/S/O d H-(--) s+:+ !!g p0 au>+++ a18 w--(+) v+(*) C++++ US P? L- !3
E---- N- K W-- M+++ !V -po+ Y+>++ t++>+++@ 5-- j++@ R++>+++ G(''') tv
b+ D- B--- e+>+++ u--(+) h->++ f+ r---(*) n-(---) !y+
Message no. 22
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 22:33:39 -0400
On Tue, 13 Sep 1994, MILLIKEN DAMION A wrote:

> luke writes:
>
> > surely the trauma damper is like an automatically-applied stimpatch?
> > (Otherwise, why couldn't a mage apply the trauma damper chemicals via a
> > patch, for the same benefit?)
>
> Hey, Cool, have a trauma damper type stim patch. Sure beats shelling out for
> they bioware. Oughta be possible to do too.

No. And no, a magician wouldn't have to test for magic loss
every time his damper kick in. All a trauma damper does is mute the
body's tendency to produce fatigue and shock inducing proteins and
enzymes as a response to a wound. It doesn't "add" any chemicals into
the body that aren't normally there, so it's not like a stim patch. It
doesn't even follow the same rules as a stim patch. No similarities.
Actually, for mages the damage compensator (which totally halts
the "going into shock" (and hence the target mods) process until it is
overloaded) is a definite must. Think about it; you can suck down
heinous drain and not even feel it if you damper is good enough.
Pain editors are cool too, because your drain can go into
physical damage, and you still don't care. I had a mage in my campaign
once who did this. Once the ol' Edtior kicked in, I rolled his drain for
him and kindly neglected to tell him of the result. Actually, I think
the Pain Editor gives you another point of Willpower too, but I'm not
sure whether I would apply this to magical tasks. Hmmmm. I don't
remember what we did.

Marc
Message no. 23
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 12:47:45 +1000
RDM writes:

[Big rant on _Trauma_Dampers_ which he thinks are _Pain_Editors_]

They're not. The Trauma Damper is the thingy which reduces stun damage by a
light, and moves one box of physical damage to the stun track. What you are
referring to is a Pain Editor (I think), which blocks out all pain signals
(Great for trolls I reckon).

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 24
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 13:01:57 +1000
John IV writes:

> Well, from what I remember, Magicians run a high risk of losing Magic
> Attribute points when they use Trauma patches...<whips out rulebook>...well,
> I can't find it, but I'm pretty sure that I saw something about it.

Well, I wasn't referring to a Trauma patch per say, I was referring to a
slap patch which contained the same drugs as a Trauma Damper uses. As for
the magic loss from a regular trauma patch, I actually don't think there is
one. That is only for stim patches. Now, would we rate a "Trauma Damper"
patch similarly to a stim patch? Myself I would say no, sinse if a magician
goes out and gets a Trauma Damper installed, he doesn't have to make a magic
loss check every time it activates.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 25
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 13:32:12 +1000
I wrote:

> surely the trauma damper is like an automatically-applied stimpatch?
> (Otherwise, why couldn't a mage apply the trauma damper chemicals via a
> patch, for the same benefit?)

Marc A Renouf wrote:

> [...] a magician wouldn't have to test for magic loss
> every time his damper kick in. All a trauma damper does is mute the
> body's tendency to produce fatigue and shock inducing proteins and
> enzymes as a response to a wound. It doesn't "add" any chemicals into
> the body that aren't normally there, so it's not like a stim patch.

How would it `mute the fatigue' without using chemicals? This still
sounds medically doubtful to me.

A more serious objection, though, is game balance. The whole reason
for the spell fatigue-resistance check is game balance. This trick
avoids it, and destroys game balance as a result.

luke
Message no. 26
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 13:36:31 +1000
Marc writes:

> Actually, for mages the damage compensator (which totally halts
> the "going into shock" (and hence the target mods) process until it is
> overloaded) is a definite must. Think about it; you can suck down
> heinous drain and not even feel it if you damper is good enough.

Yeah, but the advantage of the Trauma Damper is that it totally removes the
light drains. Much better than just removing the target numbers.

> Pain editors are cool too, because your drain can go into
> physical damage, and you still don't care. I had a mage in my campaign
> once who did this. Once the ol' Edtior kicked in, I rolled his drain for
> him and kindly neglected to tell him of the result. Actually, I think
> the Pain Editor gives you another point of Willpower too, but I'm not
> sure whether I would apply this to magical tasks. Hmmmm. I don't
> remember what we did.

You mightn't care if you take physical drain, but it does still modify your
target numbers. The Pain Editor only removes target number mods due to Stun
damage. As for the +1, no, it wouldn't effect magic rolls as it does not
specifically say it does. Good to give to bad guys though, makes those
manabolts less effective. :-)

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 27
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 13:44:16 +1000
luke writes:

> How would it `mute the fatigue' without using chemicals? This still
> sounds medically doubtful to me.

Just 'cause it involves drugs and chemicals doesn't mean that a mage has to
roll for magic loss. None of the other slap patches have the effect of
forcing a mage to roll for loss of magic, only a stim patch does.

> A more serious objection, though, is game balance. The whole reason
> for the spell fatigue-resistance check is game balance. This trick
> avoids it, and destroys game balance as a result.

Not really, the act of casting spells is designed to fatigue the caster, to
represent the energy expended in creating the effect that you want. The
effect of a Damge Compensator (I think this is the little thingy) is to
negate modifiers due to damage, including fatigue - the recipient can rock
till he drops. I see the game balance. Besides, if you go over your ten boxes
of stun damage you still cop physical and pass out, same as normal, and if
your running a Pain Editor instead of the mroe hideously expensive Damage
Compensators, then you have no idea when this will occur.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 28
From: King of Pain <mcgowan@*****.BUCKNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 08:52:08 -0400
On Wed, 14 Sep 1994, MILLIKEN DAMION A wrote:

> RDM writes:
>
> [Big rant on _Trauma_Dampers_ which he thinks are _Pain_Editors_]
>
> They're not. The Trauma Damper is the thingy which reduces stun damage by a
> light, and moves one box of physical damage to the stun track. What you are
> referring to is a Pain Editor (I think), which blocks out all pain signals
> (Great for trolls I reckon).


OOps :)


RDM
Message no. 29
From: Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 10:06:08 -0700
Doesn't say that a trauma damper is like a stimpatch. *Shrug*.
Don't know, hadn't thought about it. But by the book, I don't believe it
says anything about this.

+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|Adam Getchell|acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu | ez000270@*******.ucdavis.edu |
| acgetchell |"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent"|
+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 30
From: Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 10:35:15 -0700
On Tue, 13 Sep 1994, King of Pain wrote:

> Effective piece of cyberware, but very, very dangerous. Yeah you'll have
> a grand old time flinging around hellblasts and not even feeling
> it....until you pass out. Remember, when this baby is on you DON'T know

You're thinking of the Pain Editor, which masks all pain so that
you cannot tell what sort of condition you are in.
Perhaps Nightstalker would care to share the rules on this, but I
don't think it says anywhere that a Trauma Damper inflicts a stim patch
for the purposes of magic loss every time it is used. Until this is
resolved, I stil feel the Trauma Damper is one of the best peices of
bio/cyberware for magicians taking Drain.

RDM >

+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|Adam Getchell|acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu | ez000270@*******.ucdavis.edu |
| acgetchell |"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent"|
+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 31
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 13:36:46 -0400
On Wed, 14 Sep 1994, Luke Kendall wrote:

> How would it `mute the fatigue' without using chemicals? This still
> sounds medically doubtful to me.

Muscular fatigue is caused by anaerobic respiration, which builds
up lactic acid. Lactic acid in turn causes pain and muscle soreness
(which are what will ultimately become your target number modifiers). If
you tell the body "hey, you don't need to recognize lactic acid as pain"
then it won't, until there is a sufficient amount of damage. That's why
it only completely removes a single box. Is that less medically doubtful
now?

> A more serious objection, though, is game balance. The whole reason
> for the spell fatigue-resistance check is game balance. This trick
> avoids it, and destroys game balance as a result.

It doesn't avoid it, it merely makes it a little more tolerable,
say taking 5 boxes of drain instead of all 6 for Serious Drain. As for
game balance, since when has Shadowrun's magic system ever been concerned
with game balance? Seriously, though, it's up to the GM to decide
whether or not to allow the Trauma Damper to work against drain. It is
bioware, so it is at least plausible that it would (I mean, after all, a
cerebral booster makes you faster in Astral space.)

Marc
Message no. 32
From: Matt <mosbun@******.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 10:53:46 -0500
> On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Adam Getchell wrote:
>
> > If I were to lose essence on a magician, I'd spend that .3
> > Essence for a bioware Trauma Damper, and say goodbye to Light Drain.
> > Arguably the single most effective piece of bio/cyberware for magicians.

>Effective piece of cyberware, but very, very dangerous. Yeah you'll have
>a grand old time flinging around hellblasts and not even feeling
>it....until you pass out. Remember, when this baby is on you DON'T know
>what the condition of your ummm, health thingi(I'm at a sudden loss for
>words, how embarassing;). What does this also mean?? It means that the
>GM keeps track of it *evil GM's cackle*. And i'm not too certain about
>this part(benn a bit since i read shadowtech) but wouldn't the GM perform
>the drain resistence rolls in this situation as well?


Aren't you thinking of a Pain Editor? A Trauma Damper subtracts one box from
the amount of damage you take and adds it to the stun chart (if the damage was
physical) or gets rid of it (if the damage was stun).
And, yes, along with the Cerebral Booster it's about the best mod for a mage
to get.

Matt
Message no. 33
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Cyber on Magical Types
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 19:55:28 +1000
Marc writes:

> > A more serious objection, though, is game balance. The whole reason
> > for the spell fatigue-resistance check is game balance. This trick
> > avoids it, and destroys game balance as a result.
>
> It doesn't avoid it, it merely makes it a little more tolerable,
> say taking 5 boxes of drain instead of all 6 for Serious Drain. As for
> game balance, since when has Shadowrun's magic system ever been concerned
> with game balance? Seriously, though, it's up to the GM to decide
> whether or not to allow the Trauma Damper to work against drain. It is
> bioware, so it is at least plausible that it would (I mean, after all, a
> cerebral booster makes you faster in Astral space.)

I would say it would work fine. The damage may be from a magical source, but
it is true, real, physical (or stun fatigue) damage, so a true, real
physical piece of bioware would help. If you dissallowed the use of a Trauma
Damper for drain damage, you'd have to dissallow it for all magical related
damage (excepting manipulation spells). This means your sammies Trauma
Damper isn't going to let him take 9 boxes instead of 10 from the hellblast
the opponents mage just tossed at him. [Ever seen a players face when you
tell him the corp goon just survived a force 7 hellblast, cast with the
assistance of an elemental; the same hellblast that took out the enemies
mage, who you would think would be the most likely to have survived?]

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Cyber on Magical Types, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!